1967: A Modern History

Posted: February 17, 2015 in Uncategorized
Advertisements
Comments
  1. Marah Tarawneh says:

    “1967 is the longest year” (Tom Segev)
    If you think about it, 1967 lasted more than any other year in the middle eastern history. Palestinians are still living with the consequences that the Arab leaders caused in 1967. However, what makes this worse, is that the leaders, at that time, did not learn from 1967 and continued to act according to their idealism alone without pragmatism. The reasoning that Nassar gave for Al-Khartoum resolution started with “I feel responsible”. This shows that, even after 1967, idealism was his method because he wanted to free himself from guilt and humiliation so he wrote that resolution, because he felt responsible. Other Arab leaders also didn’t learn that they shouldn’t follow him, because even after his and their “mistake” in 1967, the people didn’t accept his resignation, so the leaders chose following Nasar and his idealism once more. The result, again, the Palestinians are still living with the consequences of 1967 and everything that followed. Therefore, 1967, was a “mistake” but the discussions that the Arab leaders made after it were the biggest mistakes.

    • Mallak Al Husban says:

      I see where your coming from;however, we can’t deny the fact that he is a great leader with a great ideology. Nasser was admired by all citizens across the arab region, and if the leaders of the Arab countries were willing to oppose Nasser’s decision and to take another alternative, the people would’ve opposed the government. His greatest influence was on people themselves not the leaders. I think leaders were more pragmatic when it came to following Nasser or not; they wanted their people’s support and their people wanted Nasser, so they followed Nasser.

      • khaleel abdel razeq says:

        I totally agree with your opinion, also he would have never earned all the love from his people if he didnt do many great stuff, then his people would never admire him and historians would not classify him as a demi-god.

  2. I really wonder if Arabs were as disillusioned as they seemed with their capabilities to fighting Israel. I am sure the intelligentsia everywhere had doubts, and military officials kept in mind that the US and other countries would support Israel if it ever needed support. The BBC’s show “20th century battlefields” suggests that Nasser was taken by surprise that the UN peacekeeping mission actually listened to him and left the Sinai, did we actually talk ourselves into that deep sh’t? It doesn’t seem very unlikely to be honest, big headed people get themselves into a lot of trouble you know.

    • Farah Sinokrot says:

      In my opinion is not that the Arabs never saw it coming or that they weren’t ready or they had a big ego that they were ignorant. i think the arabs were caught by surprise of when the israeli forces attacked the Arab airforces and so they had a weak army and no air cover and air cover is always the advantage point in any military action.

      • miralobaidi says:

        But they were the ones provoking the Israeli army.

      • Thing is: Israel DID offer some warnings. Also, as Meral said, it could be seen as a threat when Egypt mobilized its military forces. Not only that, but despite ending up with weak armed forces, even with the other ground forces of the other Arab states, Egypt continued its efforts. Whether it did so to avoid humiliation or as a last but futile effort to get Palestine back, the situation was not in favor of the Arabs.

      • Rashed says:

        The Arabs were caught by surprise by their own leaders, not just by Israel. Why would the Arabs keep fighting if they knew that they lost from day 1?

    • I don’t think the issue leading up to the war was the bigheadedness of the Arab leaders, but the misinformation they possessed and the fact that the Israeli intelligence agency was much better equipped and had steady stream of information, whereas the Arab leaders could not even communicate with their allies.

      • Well, wasn’t the communication problem during the war? and isn’t the fact that they did not take into account Israeli intelligence superiority a sign of their bigheadedness?

      • Look guys. I am just wondering if this was all a mistake. That is all

      • “I really wonder if Arabs were as disillusioned as they seemed with their capabilities to fighting Israel. I am sure the intelligentsia everywhere had doubts”
        ” Nasser was taken by surprise that the UN peacekeeping mission actually listened to him and left the Sinai, did we actually talk ourselves into that deep sh’t?”

  3. Rashed says:

    I don’t think Gamal Abdel Nasser really wanted a war then. I think he wanted to show the world, especially the Arab world, that he can scare Israel and show them that he is strong. He wanted to be a leader of the Arab world not just Egypt, and what better way to do that then by opposing Israel and showing that the other leaders don’t want to join? Egypt was doomed from the start. If you have no air force, you might as well have no army.

  4. The war went so dramatically in favor of Israel because they were able to eliminate almost all of the enemy air force while simultaneously cutting communication between the various Arab powers and providing them with misinformation.

  5. Daniel Leal says:

    I found the remark one of the men made about politicians not seeing themselves as history makers anymore but rather as men of their cause quite nuancing. It does seem that before a leader of country seemed to know the weight of his decisions on the future and saw the future and as a result a politician was a maker of change. Now politicians seem to be interested in their interests and surviving the next storm. Maybe this view comes from the fact that we study past leaders through the lens of history rather than those of current events. I think this principle may apply in conflict areas around the world, where politicians may hold even more power over the future. Is it fair to use the terms politicians and leaders interchangeably?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s